W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org > January 2006

[OK?] Re: Comments on SPARQL protocol document

From: Kendall Clark <kendall@monkeyfist.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2006 16:36:31 -0500
Message-Id: <F0B46037-4841-45C2-8417-74A9FF1E3CB1@monkeyfist.com>
Cc: public-rdf-dawg-comments@w3.org
To: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>

On Sep 16, 2005, at 5:09 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:

> (1) the SPARQL query language makes reference to the possibility of
> generating warnings under certain circumstances; cf.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-rdf-sparql-query-20050721/#construct
> In light of this, it might be appropriate for there to be some way to
> return any warnings along with the query results.


The WG has chosen a design that does not include a general warnings  
(or annotation) system, mechanism, or channel. The protocol spec  
defines two WSDL application-level faults (MalformedQuery and  
QueryRequestRefused), but there isn't a generic warning or annotation  
framework in the protocol or results format.

We discussed a design whereby a URI is returned in the XML results  
format that points to a resource that is a service annotation of the  
results of a query operation, but no consensus formed around adding  
such a feature to SPARQL this time around.

Does this response address yr comments?

Kendall Clark
Received on Tuesday, 17 January 2006 21:42:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:07 UTC